Project description:BackgroundAccurate preoperative evaluation of renal function in living kidney donor candidates (LKDCs) is crucial to prevent kidney failure after nephrectomy. We examined the performance of various estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations, including the new chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation in LKDCs.MethodsWe analyzed 752 LKDCs who were assessed for measured GFR by inulin clearance as part of routine pretransplant examination from 2006 to 2020. CKD-EPI2012 from cystatin C (CKD-EPI12cys), CKD-EPI2021 from creatinine (CKD-EPI21cr), CKD-EPI21cr-cys, Japanese modified (JPN) eGFRcr, and JPN eGFRcys were compared in determining the suitability for LKDCs.ResultsCKD-EPI12cys had the lowest absolute and relative biases, with higher P30 and P10, followed by JPN eGFRcys, CKD-EPI21cr, and CKD-EPI21cr-cys. The root mean square error was least for CKD-EPI12cys, then JPN eGFRcys, CKD-EPI21cr-cys, CKD-EPI21cr, and JPN eGFRcr. CKD-EPI21cr, CKD-EPI12cys, and CKD-EPI21cr-cys estimated GFR higher, whereas JPN eGFRcr estimated GFR lower. At the threshold of 90 mL/min/1.73 m2, CKD-EPI21cr had the highest percentage of misclassification at 37.37%, whereas JPN eGFRcr had the lowest percentage of misclassification at 6.91%. Using the age-adapted approach, JPN eGFRcr had the lowest percentage of misclassification into overestimation at 7.31%. All eGFR had >5.0%, and CKD-EPI21cr had the highest percentage of misclassification at 21.94%. Conversely, CKD-EPI21cr-cys had the lowest percentage of misclassification into underestimation at 3.19%, both at the threshold of 90 mL/min/1.73 m2 and the age-adapted approach. JPN eGFRcr had the highest percentage at 33.38% and 40.69%, respectively.ConclusionsIn evaluating the renal function of Japanese LKDCs, the new CKD-EPI equation had a lower rate of underestimation but a relatively high rate of overestimation. New GFR estimation formulas are needed to be tailored to each ethnic group to enhance the accuracy and reliability of donor selection processes.
Project description:ContextThe Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation more accurately estimates glomerular filtration rate (GFR) than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation using the same variables, especially at higher GFR, but definitive evidence of its risk implications in diverse settings is lacking.ObjectiveTo evaluate risk implications of estimated GFR using the CKD-EPI equation compared with the MDRD Study equation in populations with a broad range of demographic and clinical characteristics.Design, setting, and participantsA meta-analysis of data from 1.1 million adults (aged ≥ 18 years) from 25 general population cohorts, 7 high-risk cohorts (of vascular disease), and 13 CKD cohorts. Data transfer and analyses were conducted between March 2011 and March 2012.Main outcome measuresAll-cause mortality (84,482 deaths from 40 cohorts), cardiovascular mortality (22,176 events from 28 cohorts), and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (7644 events from 21 cohorts) during 9.4 million person-years of follow-up; the median of mean follow-up time across cohorts was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 4.2-10.5 years).ResultsEstimated GFR was classified into 6 categories (≥90, 60-89, 45-59, 30-44, 15-29, and <15 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) by both equations. Compared with the MDRD Study equation, 24.4% and 0.6% of participants from general population cohorts were reclassified to a higher and lower estimated GFR category, respectively, by the CKD-EPI equation, and the prevalence of CKD stages 3 to 5 (estimated GFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) was reduced from 8.7% to 6.3%. In estimated GFR of 45 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m(2) by the MDRD Study equation, 34.7% of participants were reclassified to estimated GFR of 60 to 89 mL/min/1.73 m(2) by the CKD-EPI equation and had lower incidence rates (per 1000 person-years) for the outcomes of interest (9.9 vs 34.5 for all-cause mortality, 2.7 vs 13.0 for cardiovascular mortality, and 0.5 vs 0.8 for ESRD) compared with those not reclassified. The corresponding adjusted hazard ratios were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86) for all-cause mortality, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.65-0.82) for cardiovascular mortality, and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.27-0.88) for ESRD. Similar findings were observed in other estimated GFR categories by the MDRD Study equation. Net reclassification improvement based on estimated GFR categories was significantly positive for all outcomes (range, 0.06-0.13; all P < .001). Net reclassification improvement was similarly positive in most subgroups defined by age (<65 years and ≥65 years), sex, race/ethnicity (white, Asian, and black), and presence or absence of diabetes and hypertension. The results in the high-risk and CKD cohorts were largely consistent with the general population cohorts.ConclusionThe CKD-EPI equation classified fewer individuals as having CKD and more accurately categorized the risk for mortality and ESRD than did the MDRD Study equation across a broad range of populations.
Project description:BackgroundEstimates of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) that are based on serum creatinine are routinely used; however, they are imprecise, potentially leading to the overdiagnosis of chronic kidney disease. Cystatin C is an alternative filtration marker for estimating GFR.MethodsUsing cross-sectional analyses, we developed estimating equations based on cystatin C alone and in combination with creatinine in diverse populations totaling 5352 participants from 13 studies. These equations were then validated in 1119 participants from 5 different studies in which GFR had been measured. Cystatin and creatinine assays were traceable to primary reference materials.ResultsMean measured GFRs were 68 and 70 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area in the development and validation data sets, respectively. In the validation data set, the creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations that used creatinine or cystatin C alone. Bias was similar among the three equations, with a median difference between measured and estimated GFR of 3.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the combined equation, as compared with 3.7 and 3.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with the creatinine equation and the cystatin C equation (P=0.07 and P=0.05), respectively. Precision was improved with the combined equation (interquartile range of the difference, 13.4 vs. 15.4 and 16.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), respectively [P=0.001 and P<0.001]), and the results were more accurate (percentage of estimates that were >30% of measured GFR, 8.5 vs. 12.8 and 14.1, respectively [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). In participants whose estimated GFR based on creatinine was 45 to 74 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), the combined equation improved the classification of measured GFR as either less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) or greater than or equal to 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) (net reclassification index, 19.4% [P<0.001]) and correctly reclassified 16.9% of those with an estimated GFR of 45 to 59 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) as having a GFR of 60 ml or higher per minute per 1.73 m(2).ConclusionsThe combined creatinine-cystatin C equation performed better than equations based on either of these markers alone and may be useful as a confirmatory test for chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).
Project description:The aim of this study was to identify the optimal equation that accurately estimates the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and the chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage in the Chinese population.A total of 1296 Chinese patients aged 18-65 years old were enrolled in this study. The estimated GFRs (eGFRs) calculated separately by three Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations and three Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations were compared with the reference GFR (rGFR) measured by the 99Tcm-DTPA renal dynamic imaging method.By Bland-Altman analysis, eGFRcys and eGFRscr_cys performed similarly, showing the tightest limits of agreement among the six equations. They also achieved the first and second highest 30% and 50% accuracies. Using a combination of the serum creatinine and cystatin C levels (eGFRscr_cys) could improve the bias (-0.3 for eGFRscr_cys) of the equation and achieve the highest diagnostic accuracy for renal insufficiency (AUC60, 0.953; P < 0.05, except for eGFR_MDRD). All equations predicted stage 3 CKD with moderate accuracy (49.7-51.4%) and stage 5 CKD with good accuracy (90.2-96.4%). For stage 1 CKD, eGFRcys showed a higher percentage of misclassification than the other equations. All equations seemed to perform poorly at predicting stage 2 and 4 CKD, as compared to the other CKD stages. eGFRscr_cys was the best-performing equation in terms of accurate classification of the CKD stage based on the overall performance (kappa value, 0.423).For a Chinese population, the CKD-EPIscr_cys equation seems more suitable for estimating the GFR than the other equations. Each equation had its own advantages in predicting different CKD stages.
Project description:BackgroundEquations to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are routinely used to assess kidney function. Current equations have limited precision and systematically underestimate measured GFR at higher values.ObjectiveTo develop a new estimating equation for GFR: the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation.DesignCross-sectional analysis with separate pooled data sets for equation development and validation and a representative sample of the U.S. population for prevalence estimates.SettingResearch studies and clinical populations ("studies") with measured GFR and NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), 1999 to 2006.Participants8254 participants in 10 studies (equation development data set) and 3896 participants in 16 studies (validation data set). Prevalence estimates were based on 16,032 participants in NHANES.MeasurementsGFR, measured as the clearance of exogenous filtration markers (iothalamate in the development data set; iothalamate and other markers in the validation data set), and linear regression to estimate the logarithm of measured GFR from standardized creatinine levels, sex, race, and age.ResultsIn the validation data set, the CKD-EPI equation performed better than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation, especially at higher GFR (P < 0.001 for all subsequent comparisons), with less bias (median difference between measured and estimated GFR, 2.5 vs. 5.5 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)), improved precision (interquartile range [IQR] of the differences, 16.6 vs. 18.3 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)), and greater accuracy (percentage of estimated GFR within 30% of measured GFR, 84.1% vs. 80.6%). In NHANES, the median estimated GFR was 94.5 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (IQR, 79.7 to 108.1) vs. 85.0 (IQR, 72.9 to 98.5) mL/min per 1.73 m(2), and the prevalence of chronic kidney disease was 11.5% (95% CI, 10.6% to 12.4%) versus 13.1% (CI, 12.1% to 14.0%).LimitationThe sample contained a limited number of elderly people and racial and ethnic minorities with measured GFR.ConclusionThe CKD-EPI creatinine equation is more accurate than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study equation and could replace it for routine clinical use.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
Project description:BackgroundEstimating kidney glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is of utmost importance in many clinical conditions. However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of GFR estimating equations over all ages and degrees of kidney impairment. We evaluated the reliability of two major equations for GFR estimation, the CKD-EPI and Schwartz equations, with urinary clearance of inulin as gold standard.Methods and findingsThe study included 10,610 participants referred to the Renal and Metabolic Function Exploration Unit of Edouard Herriot Hospital (Lyon, France). GFR was measured by urinary inulin clearance (only first measurement kept for analysis) then estimated with isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS)-traceable CKD-EPI and Schwartz equations. The participants' ages ranged from 3 to 90 y, and the measured GFRs from 3 to 160 ml/min/1.73 m2. A linear mixed-effects model was used to model the bias (mean ratio of estimated GFR to measured GFR). Equation reliability was also assessed using precision (interquartile range [IQR] of the ratio) and accuracy (percentage of estimated GFRs within the 10% [P10] and 30% [P30] limits above and below the measured GFR). In the whole sample, the mean ratio with the CKD-EPI equation was significantly higher than that with the Schwartz equation (1.17 [95% CI 1.16; 1.18] versus 1.08 [95% CI 1.07; 1.09], p < 0.001, t-test). At GFR values of 60-89 ml/min/1.73 m2, the mean ratios with the Schwartz equation were closer to 1 than the mean ratios with the CKD-EPI equation whatever the age class (1.02 [95% CI 1.01; 1.03] versus 1.15 [95% CI 1.13; 1.16], p < 0.001, t-test). In young adults (18-40 y), the Schwartz equation had a better precision and was also more accurate than the CKD-EPI equation at GFR values under 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (IQR: 0.32 [95% CI 0.28; 0.33] versus 0.40 [95% CI 0.36; 0.44]; P30: 81.4 [95% CI 78.1; 84.7] versus 63.8 [95% CI 59.7; 68.0]) and also at GFR values of 60-89 ml/min/1.73 m2. In all patients aged ≥65 y, the CKD-EPI equation performed better than the Schwartz equation (IQR: 0.33 [95% CI 0.31; 0.34] versus 0.40 [95% CI 0.38; 0.41]; P30: 77.6 [95% CI 75.7; 79.5] versus 67.5 [95% CI 65.4; 69.7], respectively). In children and adolescents (2-17 y), the Schwartz equation was superior to the CKD-EPI equation (IQR: 0.23 [95% CI 0.21; 0.24] versus 0.33 [95% CI 0.31; 0.34]; P30: 88.6 [95% CI 86.7; 90.4] versus 29.4 [95% CI 26.8; 32.0]). This study is limited by its retrospective design, single-center setting with few non-white patients, and small number of patients with severe chronic kidney disease.ConclusionsThe results from this study suggest that the Schwartz equation may be more reliable than the CKD-EPI equation for estimating GFR in children and adolescents and in adults with mild to moderate kidney impairment up to age 40 y.
Project description:AimTo compare the performance of the Nanra and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate in pregnancy against the 24 h urine creatinine clearance.MethodsPregnant women had 24 h urine collections with simultaneous serum creatinine levels. Measured 24 h urine creatinine clearance was compared to two equations: Nanra and CKD-EPI. Level of concordance was measured, with an a priori bias acceptance of ±15 ml/min/1.73 m2.ResultsA total of 53 synchronous urine and serum creatinine samples were analysed. The Nanra equation had a bias of -13.4 ml/min/1.73 m2 while the CKD-EPI equation had bias of 14.2 ml/min/1.73 m2. Both equations showed a high degree of proportional error and had poor agreement with 24 h urine creatinine clearance.ConclusionsNone of the equations were shown to reliably measure the estimated glomerular filtration rate in pregnant women. A valid serum creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate equation in pregnancy is yet to be established.
Project description:BackgroundThe glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equation incorporating both cystatin C and creatinine perform better than those using creatinine or cystatin C alone in patients with reduced GFR. Whether this equation performs well in kidney transplant recipients cross-sectionally, and more importantly, over time has not been addressed.MethodsWe analyzed four GFR estimating equations in participants of the Angiotensin II Blockade for Chronic Allograft Nephropathy Trial (NCT 00067990): Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations based on serum cystatin C and creatinine (eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC)), cystatin C alone (eGFR (CKD-EPI-CysC)), creatinine alone (eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat)) and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equation (eGFR (MDRD)). Iothalamate GFR served as a standard (mGFR).ResultsmGFR, serum creatinine, and cystatin C shortly after transplant were 56.1 ± 17.0 ml/min/1.73 m(2), 1.2 ± 0.4 mg/dl, and 1.2 ± 0.3 mg/l respectively. eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) was most precise (R(2) = 0.50) but slightly more biased than eGFR (MDRD); 9.0 ± 12.7 versus 6.4 ± 15.8 ml/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. This improved precision was most evident in recipients with mGFR >60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). For relative accuracy, eGFR (MDRD) and eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) had the highest percentage of estimates falling within 30% of mGFR; 75.8 and 68.9%, respectively. Longitudinally, equations incorporating cystatin C most closely paralleled the change in mGFR.ConclusioneGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) is more precise and reflects GFR change over time reasonably well. eGFR (MDRD) had superior performance in recipients with mGFR between 30 and 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2).
Project description:Assessment of renal function relies on the estimation of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Existing eGFR equations, usually based on serum levels of creatinine and/or cystatin C, are not uniformly accurate across patient populations. In the present study, we expanded a recent proof-of-concept approach to optimize an eGFR equation targeting the adult population with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD), based on a nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) derived 'metabolite constellation' (GFRNMR). A total of 1855 serum samples were partitioned into development, internal validation and external validation datasets. The new GFRNMR equation used serum myo-inositol, valine, creatinine and cystatin C plus age and sex. GFRNMR had a lower bias to tracer measured GFR (mGFR) than existing eGFR equations, with a median bias (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 0.0 (-1.0; 1.0) mL/min/1.73 m2 for GFRNMR vs. -6.0 (-7.0; -5.0) mL/min/1.73 m2 for the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation that combines creatinine and cystatin C (CKD-EPI2012) (p < 0.0001). Accuracy (95% CI) within 15% of mGFR (1-P15) was 38.8% (34.3; 42.5) for GFRNMR vs. 47.3% (43.2; 51.5) for CKD-EPI2012 (p < 0.010). Thus, GFRNMR holds promise as an alternative way to assess eGFR with superior accuracy in adult patients with and without CKD.
Project description:IntroductionTimely detection leading to the implementation of reno-protective measures reduces the progression of diabetic kidney disease. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is a major surrogate of kidney function. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) Equation is a tool to estimate GFR. This protocol outlines a systematic-review, assessing the diagnostic accuracy of the CKD-EPI equation in adults with diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and grey literature will be searched for publications in English, Farsi, Dutch and Chinese from 2009 (when CKD-EPI was first introduced) to January 2019. Bridging searches will be conducted to capture literature published from January 2019 until final review publication. The inclusion criteria will be (1) study participants with diabetes; (2) age ≥18 years; (3) creatinine-based CKD-EPI eGFR as index test; (4) measured GFR using the clearance/plasma disappearance of inulin, iohexol, iothalamate, diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid (DTPA) or chromium labelled ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Cr-EDTA) as reference test; (5) report of the diagnostic accuracy of the index test. Exclusion criteria will be participants with renal transplant, chronic use of corticosteroids, chronic inflammatory diseases, pregnancy, non-diabetes related kidney disease, thalassaemia, heart failure, pregnancy and potential kidney donors as well as critically ill patients. Screening, eligibility check, risk of bias assessment and data extraction will be carried out by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies will be discussed, and third-party opinion will be sought. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A quantitative synthesis of the aggregated-data will be used if the included studies are homogenous.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is required. The outcome will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The results will help researchers and clinicians evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the creatinine-based CKD-EPI eGFR in adults with diabetes.Prospero registration numberCRD42018108776.